Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Parker (actor)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 08:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

George Parker (actor)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:BLP of an actor, not properly sourced as passing WP:NACTOR. As always, actors are not automatically entitled to have articles just because they've had roles -- having roles is literally an actor's job description, so every actor who has ever existed at all would be "inherently" notable if listing roles were all it took -- and instead, an actor has to be able to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about him. But the "notable" role here is a recurring supporting role in a Netflix series, where NACTOR requires multiple significant roles, not just one -- and otherwise the only other things listed in his filmography are short films and minor guest characters, which are not "significant" roles for the purposes of NACTOR, and the only sources are a brief blurb in a listicle about the entire cast of the Netflix series on an unreliable entertainment blog, and the cast listing of a play he was once in on the self-published website of the theatre that staged it, neither of which are reliable or GNG-supporting sources at all. Bearcat (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 13:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * If having roles is "literally an actor's job" then I think the criteria listed under WP:NACTOR must be updated so we can all know that supporting/recurring roles does not pass criterion #1 as it does not say anything about acting is their job but that subject may be notable if they had significant roles in multiple notable motion pictures.  dxneo  (talk) 11:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It clearly says "significant" roles, and "may be" notable, none of which guarantees anything. Oaktree b (talk) 16:42, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not against the nom, I'm actually leaning torwards delete as the subject fails WP:GNG (per nom), just that I've noticed that some of these guidelines go against each other as they somewhat lack clarity, take WP:AfD/Dan Fable for an example, one admin was confused by the guidelines listed under WP:NSONG and WP:MUSICBIO.  dxneo  (talk) 17:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete: This is the extent of coverage I can find . Trivial coverage, does not appear notable. Oaktree b (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * His best known role in "Bodies" is a supporting character, which I wouldn't call "significant"; the rest are trivial. Just another working actor. Oaktree b (talk) 16:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.